Rating: 
Summary: The Definitive Work
Review: This is the definitive work on D-Day. After reading it, I visited the Normandy beaches, museums and St. Mere Eglise. The book truly enhanced my visit. It is extremely well written and reads like a novel instead of a historical document.
Rating: 
Summary: Very enjoyable, second only to Citizen Soldiers
Review: If a reader would want to know why Stephen Ambrose has been so successful as a professor and author, this book can help explain that. Of all of the things I have read by Ambrose, this book, and the even-more-amazing Citizen Soldiers truly stand out as masterpieces of education- thay make a reader want to know more about some of the most climactic days in the history of the world, and dleivers that infomration at a good clip with alternatively funny, sad, poignant, and inspiring stories all rolling one after another.
I only gave this book 4 stars because I was so blown away by Citizen Soldiers, which picks up where this book left off. By no mean should a casual observer think nothing of this book- instead all of the planning, logisitcs, and effort of June 6, 1944 will come to life.
Rating:
Summary: I dont read but i read this
Review: I am from Taipei Taiwan, a chinese but after i read this book i felt that I was American~ The detailed description of soldiers in this book left images in my head that i dont seem to be able to forget. My concept of war was totally changed after reading this book. Steven Ambrose is a amazing writer all of his books should be read and kept for collection
Rating:
Summary: Ambrose is Correct
Review: Euro-centric critics charge that this book mistakenly lauds the accomplishments of American GIs over the other Allies. That's a convenient criticism to make in the context of a book focusing on a single major operation in the European theater. But Ambrose could have powerfully supported that thesis by pointing out that the Americans successfully prosecuted a true world war on multiple fronts that could not have been more distant and dissimilar in geography and opponent. Nothing comparable has been accomplished by any nation, before or since. As gallant as they were, the British and Soviets could not have done it.
Rating:
Summary: Ambrose captures the intensity
Review: Stephen E. Ambrose has done extensive research, including many hundreds of interviews with D Day veterans; American, Canadian, British and German. This exciting narrative makes extensive use of these oral histories. This book comprehensively covers both the planning and execution of the enormous effort to establish a beach head and begin the invasion to end the war in Europe.The planning took two years. Everything had to be considered such as the tides, where German defenses were located, where there could be some element of surprise, how to train allied troops for every possible contingency, how to unload heavy equipment, how to provide artillary, air and naval coverage of the landing etc. It was a huge undertaking and a firm date could not be established until weather conditions were certain. Thus, June 5th 1944 was postponed to June 6th due to poor weather. Further postponements would have led to a much longer postponement until favorable tide conditions once again prevailed. The coordination involved was mindboggling but, it was carried out. The invasion was preceded by the landing of airborne troops by both parachute and glider. The invasion took place on five beaches in Normandy. Three were Brtish and Canadian landing sites and two (Utah Beach and Omaha Beach) were American sites. The most intense fighting was at Omaha Beach which was guarded by cliffs from which the Germans could fire down. Indeed, for a couple of hours it appeared that the landing might be a failure. However, although most D Day goals were not reached as to troop placements, the most important task of establishing beach heads was accomplished. I notice that some earlier reviewers take exception with Ambrose for stating that German troops were inferior. He did not say that!! What Ambrose says is that the Germans had too much land to defend so they were spread too thin. Additionally, Ambrose points out that many of the troops were Polish and French conscripts who did not really want to be fighting; not Germans. Since they were spread out so thin, it was necessary to rely on many German troops who were either very young or quite old. Also, not knowing where the landing would take place, many German troops were defending Calais or even the coastal areas of Belgium and much further north into Norway. So, Ambrose does say the German troops defending Normandy were not of the same quality of the Allied troops but for the reason just set forth, not because they were inferior. German troops were further hampered by the fact that Hitler insisted on the minutest control of events and he was sleeping until noon on the day of the invasion. Panzer divisions could not be properly deployed because only Hitler, not the field marshalls, had the authority to deploy them. Therefore, with all of these factors considered, the Allied effort was indeed the superior one. This is a fascinating history and it gives a great appreciation of the painstaking planning, coordination and execution of this important and highly intense event. I highly recommend it.
Rating: 
Summary: Good Read, Average History
Review: For those familiar with the Stephen Ambrose Method, D-Day is nothing new. The same Amero-centric Pop-historical style present in earlier works replicates itself in this slightly watered-down account of how the US Army single-handedly won the war in Europe - little mention is made of the allies or even the other US services. Nevertheless, if you are not overly familiar with military history, or just want to enjoy several evenings of good wartime anecdotes, you could do worse. Copious amounts of research have resulted in a work eminently readable, but containing little true analysis - this is unfortunate, as it is analysis that differentiates a true history from mere chronology. Summary: well written, possibly a good general background book, but not the definitive work on the subject. Advanced readers should stick with Cornelius Ryan. Three stars.
Rating: 
Summary: History perverted
Review: It seems obvious that Ambrose has a problem with our British allies, for he seems to relish in taking pot shots at their expense. While he bad mouths the British Eighth Army's victory at El Alamein, arguing the Germans were under manned and under equipped, he leaves out the fact this same German army ran rampant over the Americans at the Kesserine Pass and was eventually pushed back, not by Patton's forces, but by Britain's famed Desert Rats. Nor does he mention that when the British moved on Caen, they faced five German Panzer divisions, four of them Waffen SS divisions (including 11 SS Panzer Division, veterans of the Eastern Front) -- some of the most formidable German forces in Normandy at the time of the landings. He claims the German soldier was 'inferior' to the average American GI in every way. Really?! I suppose that's why it took nearly half the free world to defeat the Wehrmact. How would the Americans and British have fared against the German Sixth Army? I'm going to say not very well. America was not the only country to land on D-Day. The Americans landed on two beaches. The Brits landed on three. (Juno Beach was a mix of Brits and Canadians). Also, let us not forget the Free French, the Czechs, the Poles, the New Zealanders... all of them were there. People consider Ambrose this country's 'eminent World War II historian.' His stuff is biased and self serving. His anecdotal material is top notch -- but his take on history is perverse. As great as a sacrifice and contribution the States made, it did not win the war by itself. Strangely enough, for a supposed historian, Ambrose is blatantly ignorant of this fact.
Rating: 
Summary: Entertaining, but biased
Review: I first read this book 4 years ago, and found it so brilliant that I immediately started reading it again when I had read the last page. Since then, however, I've read several other books on the subject, and through the great books of Hastings, D'Este and Keegan I've gained a far better understanding of the D-Day landings and all the problems the Allies faced. Compared to these books, "D-Day" is, to put it mildly, of very dubious quality. Ambrose's first major mistake is his ridiculous claim that men born and raised in democracies will always fight better than men from countries ruled by dictators. Although this would've been nice, it's far from the truth. The Soviets, Germans and Japanese were all exceptionally hard and fanatical soldiers, known to fight to the very last man, and without doubt better soldiers than, say, the Americans, Brits or Canadians. This is perfectly clear to most professional historians, but Ambrose deliberately ignores historical facts if they don't match his political views.
Ambrose's simple(and idiotic, one might add) conclusion is that since Germany lost the war, the Americans and Brits were better soldiers. Little attention is paid to the fact that by 1944, the flower of German youth had already been wiped out in the great slaughterhouse known as "The Eastern Front," and that lack of fuel had made the German Panzer Units quite useless in offensive operations. The Germans aren't the only ones who are victims of Ambrose's subjective approach to the war. The Brits are, quite wrongly, characterized as over-cautios pessimists, as poor soldiers and nearly as a burden to his "glorious Americans." To support this ridiculous claim, Ambrose makes use of two witness-accounts, from Montgomery and "many Germans I have spoken with" respectively. Montgomery is quoted as saying that his men weren't really killers(a statement made during the Italian campaign) while the Germans, according to Ambrose, "were surprised by how often the British would surrender as soon as they got the chance to do so." This is, of course, pure rubbish. First of all, Montgomery regarded his men as some of the toughest soldiers in the world(his tribute to the British soldier in his memoirs confirms this), and his statement that his men weren't killers are taken completely out of context.
His German source is even more unreliable, as the Germans for some reason or the other, always regarded the British soldier as better than the American. If this view was mistaken or not is a another discussion, but the fact is that the British were respected and even admired by the Germans until the end of the war. To conclude, this book is totally useless as a serious account of D-Day. Yet, Ambrose is a very good story-teller, and the interviews with Allied and German veterans are very interesting.
Therefore, I would advice the reader to enjoy the first-hand accounts, but to ignore the rest of the book.
Rating:
Summary: Great Book
Review: After you read this book, you'll want your next vacation to be the beaches of Normandy
Rating:
Summary: D-Day by Stephen Ambrose is one of the best accounts of WWII
Review: I have been interested in World War II for a while now, and I have read many books about the subject. I must say that D-Day is my main point of interest, leading up to the end of the war in 1945. This book, along with Citizen Soldiers, captures my full interest and leaves me clinging to the pages. Stephen Ambrose's collection of accounts from the veterans of the D-Day landings is amazing. I recommend this book to anyone who is interested in World War II.
|
